UT Campus Carry - Surprise!!

[TXBO]

• An office occupant who chooses to exercise this
discretion must provide oral notice that the concealed
carry of a handgun in the occupant’s office is
prohibited."

This looks like a very convenient way to unveil any license holders.

Do you really think a prof is going to make that speech EVERY time? And the student can just say, "okay, let's meet in a conference room."

And the professor will freak out, lock himself in his office, start grading the student's papers harshly, etc etc etc.

Exactly. Faculty is prohibited from inquiring about CHL but verbal notification would out every one of them.

[TXBO]

Do you really think a prof is going to make that speech EVERY time? And the student can just say, "okay, let's meet in a conference room."

And the professor will freak out, lock himself in his office, start grading the student's papers harshly, etc etc etc.

And the student will post negative feedback, give a negative review, etc. and the professor won't be considered for tenure, contract extension, etc., then the student will file a complaint with a relevant dean about being discriminated against... the kiss of death for college staff.

Tenured professors won't care.
Discrimination only counts in academia for politically correct causes. 2A isn't one of those.

Exactly

[ELB]

Thoughts, scenarios, assuming that the working group is correct that this can be done on an office-by-office basis:

1. Prof will not like to say 'no guns' every time a student comes to the office. Bet he will instead post some "no guns" sign. Doubt he will post the required one, since it is too dang big (note that the working group verified for itself that a legally sufficient sign is at least 2' x 3'). Any student legally carrying with half-a-education in the LTC laws will recognize that post-it note doesn't count and carry right in. Everybody's happy.

2. The prof, at beginning of semester, makes an announcement in class that he doesn't allow concealed carry in his office. That would seem to cover it at least for the LTC'ers who are in class that day.

3. Course syllabus or maybe course catalog, or may paper handed out at beginning of semester carries written notice. If it is in correct wording and languages, then it applies. If it's not, then it's just wastebasket fodder.

[RHenriksen]

Who were the "gun owners" in the working group? You would think they had enough sense to keep some of the unenforceable reccomendations out of this document.

Having sense is different from having meaningful influence

[mreed911]

Who were the "gun owners" in the working group? You would think they had enough sense to keep some of the unenforceable reccomendations out of this document.

Gun owners. Not lawyers, or even CHL holders. :)

[stingeragent]

If they prohibit dorms, where is the student supposed to secure there firearm every night? In the car?

[TrueFlog]

Regardless of S.B. 11, Texas law will continue to prohibit
license holders from carrying handguns in certain on-
campus locations. These include:
...
• The premises where a high school, collegiate, or
professional sporting event or interscholastic event is
taking place. This would include UT athletic events.

Does the law still ban concealed carry at collegiate sporting events? I know the section that previously banned it wasn't removed or struck from the books. SB 11 doesn't explicitly call out sporting events as no longer off-limits; it only states that concealed carry is allowed "on the
campus of an institution of higher education or private or independent institution of higher education in this state." So does SB11 override the previous prohibition? And what if the event is being held off-campus (eg. OU/TX at the Cotton Bowl)? SB11 makes no reference to collegiate sporting that are held off-campus.

[C-dub]

Regardless of S.B. 11, Texas law will continue to prohibit
license holders from carrying handguns in certain on-
campus locations. These include:
...
• The premises where a high school, collegiate, or
professional sporting event or interscholastic event is
taking place. This would include UT athletic events.

Does the law still ban concealed carry at collegiate sporting events? I know the section that previously banned it wasn't removed or struck from the books. SB 11 doesn't explicitly call out sporting events as no longer off-limits; it only states that concealed carry is allowed "on the
campus of an institution of higher education or private or independent institution of higher education in this state." So does SB11 override the previous prohibition? And what if the event is being held off-campus (eg. OU/TX at the Cotton Bowl)? SB11 makes no reference to collegiate sporting that are held off-campus.

I think college sporting events will still still be off limits.

[chasfm11]

If they prohibit dorms, where is the student supposed to secure there firearm every night? In the car?

I watched one of the new videos on this subject. The UT spokesperson/member of the committee pointed out that a very small percentage of those eligible for CHL lived in dorms. The vast majority of the dorm occupants are those under 21 years old. I don't remember him mentioning anything about gun storage but I assumed that cars would be the only option.

[TrueFlog]

I think college sporting events will still still be off limits.

I took a closer look at the law, and I'm inclined to agree. SB 11 effectively negates Section 46.03 (a)(1) which generally prohibits concealed carry on college campuses. Section 46.035 (b)(2) prohibits concealed carry at college sporting events and is not affected by SB 11. So I guess carrying at a college sporting event would still be an offense under 46.035 (b)(2). That's too bad...

[dru]

Thoughts, scenarios, assuming that the working group is correct that this can be done on an office-by-office basis:

1. Prof will not like to say 'no guns' every time a student comes to the office. Bet he will instead post some "no guns" sign. Doubt he will post the required one, since it is too dang big (note that the working group verified for itself that a legally sufficient sign is at least 2' x 3'). Any student legally carrying with half-a-education in the LTC laws will recognize that post-it note doesn't count and carry right in. Everybody's happy.

Maybe. Don't underestimate the shrill panicking foaming at the mouth that the gun free UT professors will have. They'll say "no guns" till the day they mercifully die.

2. The prof, at beginning of semester, makes an announcement in class that he doesn't allow concealed carry in his office. That would seem to cover it at least for the LTC'ers who are in class that day.

I don't know that would fly. I can't imagine that many professors actually take attendance, especially in the lower level classes so it would be hard to prove that a student was ever given oral notice. What if a student came in late? or stepped out to use the restroom while the announcement was made. I think the only way to satisfy the oral requirement of the whole thing is to say it when someone comes to your office

3. Course syllabus or maybe course catalog, or may paper handed out at beginning of semester carries written notice. If it is in correct wording and languages, then it applies. If it's not, then it's just wastebasket fodder.

But for purposes of campus carry, the notice must be oral, not printed. Professors can't use the 30.06 sign to designate their own offices off limits. The university may do that, possibly at a university health clinic or lab, but the professors have to give oral notice.

[oohrah]

I think college sporting events will still still be off limits.

I took a closer look at the law, and I'm inclined to agree. SB 11 effectively negates Section 46.03 (a)(1) which generally prohibits concealed carry on college campuses. Section 46.035 (b)(2) prohibits concealed carry at college sporting events and is not affected by SB 11. So I guess carrying at a college sporting event would still be an offense under 46.035 (b)(2). That's too bad...

Incorrect. SB 11 specifically says that (b)(2) does NOT apply - unless given effective notice under 30.06. So, even private universities would have to post their stadiums 30.06 to prevent CC.

This is also discussed on page 18 under Recommendation #8.

[ELB]

...

2. The prof, at beginning of semester, makes an announcement in class that he doesn't allow concealed carry in his office. That would seem to cover it at least for the LTC'ers who are in class that day.

I don't know that would fly. I can't imagine that many professors actually take attendance, especially in the lower level classes so it would be hard to prove that a student was ever given oral notice. What if a student came in late? or stepped out to use the restroom while the announcement was made. I think the only way to satisfy the oral requirement of the whole thing is to say it when someone comes to your office

I don't know why it wouldn't fly. So what if a few students cut class, come late, or run to the bathroom? If it comes to light that a student with a license has a concealed handgun in the prof's office and he calls the campus cops with a complaint, it will be on the student to convince the responding officers that he really wasn't in the class the day the prof made the announcement (and the fact that the prof may not have taken attendance will not work in the student's favor at this point). The officers may very well decide that "absence" is an argument the student can make in court, where it may or may not be successful.

3. Course syllabus or maybe course catalog, or may paper handed out at beginning of semester carries written notice. If it is in correct wording and languages, then it applies. If it's not, then it's just wastebasket fodder.

But for purposes of campus carry, the notice must be oral, not printed. Professors can't use the 30.06 sign to designate their own offices off limits. The university may do that, possibly at a university health clinic or lab, but the professors have to give oral notice.

The university (actually at this point, the working group) doesn't want a bunch of signs so they say the notice must be oral, but if a prof chooses to put the written notice in his course materials, there is no one who is going to gainsay him on that. (In fact,wouldn't surprise me for them to argue First Amendment protection for signs and other written notices). Look at all the deference they give them about their office spaces -- they try to tell him what he can and can't put in his course materials and there will be a major revolt just on the that principle alone. (and remember, these are the guys foaming at the mouth we are talking about here.) Whether it legally constitutes "effective notice" won't get hashed out until it gets to court.

The real solution, of course, is for the University to be brought to heel about the whole "each prof gets to choose" deal, as Mr. Cotton pointed out early on. But if that survives the President and the Regent's review, then I have little doubt there will be some mouth-foamers who will use every avenue to fight back, whether the campus rules say the can or not.

[ELB]

Another interesting bit: The footnotes reference a memorandum from the Coalition to Keep Guns Off Campus (CKGOC), and cites argument that the "counsel' for CKGOC made. (I don't know if these are argument made in the memorandum or the counsel go to make them orally to the Working Group).

Who are these guys and how did their memorandum come to the attention of the Working Group? Did the Working Group solicit input from them, did it just arrive in the mail and they read it? Did TSRA/NRA/Independence Institute (Dave Kopel) or any other groups get solicited or get to submit "memorandums?"

It appears the WG rejected CKGOC's recommendations about banning guns in classrooms an its stats claiming rapes on campus and suicides increased after campus carry was implemented on other campuses, but I wonder what influence they had did creep in? Bloomberg's astroturf Everytown was cited as a source for data as well, and GunFreeUT was mentioned as well. The only "balance" I saw was a reference to Students for Concealed Carry (who countered the suicide increase attributable to campus carry claims), but says it doesn't know the evidence that SCC used. (Did they ask for it?)

(Oh, and they cite the much-debunked "one in five campus women raped" statistic as well. )

Perhaps this was a clever bit of politics to counter a couple groups that were pestering them -- the WG can say "yes we carefully considered your arguments and found them lacking), but overall I find it disturbing that two such overt anti-gun and integrity-free organizations were consulted for "data".

When it comes time for the Legislature to review the "progress" of the state universities, this should be an interesting question.